Economics For “Big Games” Don’t Work On Vita Says Sony’s Don Mesa

Don Mesa, Director of Product Planning & Platform Software Innovation at Sony Computer Entertainment America, recently wrote a post on the PlayStation Blog, highlighting the new slim PlayStation Vita model that was released this week. The system costs $200 and comes with a port of Borderlands 2 developed for Vita, along with an 8GB memory card.

In the comments section of said post, a PS Blog reader expressed concern that Sony weren’t releasing enough “console-quality” games for the Vita as initially promised when the device was introduced, and that he/she felt the system is lacking in such titles. Mesa replied to his comment, and you can view their conversation below:

User comment: That’s a nice price point, so hopefully more people will finally see what we loyal Vita owners have been raving about. With more users, hopefully we’ll get some decent bigger games. I seriously do love the indies and even the ports of older games. I honestly do, so please keep publishing them. But…

We were also promised console-quality games for Vita. Killzone and Uncharted have been the only decent “console-quality” games (in my opinion) so far. Uncharted wasn’t even that good. We need a few good AAA games that are actually developed by the proper studios, and not farmed out to smaller devs who can’t quite capture what makes a series work on consoles.

Don Mesa’s reply: Thanks for your support. As for the big games:

The economics simply don’t work with the traditional process. We have to do something different to get AAA games on Vita. We accomplished it to a certain degree by making PS4 games work on Vita via remote play. PS Now will be another way, streaming PS3 games on Vita. I can’t wait until PS Now is out on Vita – I hope you’ll try out the experience and let me know what you think.

Note that Mesa’s reply pertains specifically to Western support, as he probably can’t speak for Sony’s Japanese division. While news of major big-budget games for the Vita has been scant in the west, Sony’s Japan Studio has been working on quirky games such as Oreshika (a sequel to an RPG that debuted on PSOne) and hunting-action games inspired by Monster Hunter, such as Soul Sacrifice Delta and Freedom Wars.

All three of those games have been confirmed for release in the West, and Sony have also made it easier for developers to port certain kinds of PlayStation 3 games to Vita, in order to drum up more support for the platform. Developers in Japan such as Nippon Ichi and Gust have been taking advantage of this by porting their PS3 games over to the system. Meanwhile, in the West, a number of indie developers have been doing the same, or using the Unity middleware to develop across multiple platforms, including Vita.

“Don’t forget, let’s keep the port budget low so the performance is unpolished!”

Firion Hope

Ugh Now and Remote play are NOT the same thing and they’re minor selling points at best. Stuff like Gravity Rush and Killzone Liberation seemd to do well and are really only possible on Vita, I don’t see why they don’t do more of that. Heck even budget games would be better than nothing, but it seems as far as SCEA is concerned it’s just a Remote play machine. I give props to SCEJ for sticking with it at least, glad we have them and third parties to keep the thing alive

Nesther

But Killzone Liberation also worked on PSP.

Firion Hope

oops think I meant mercenary!

malek86

That sounds pretty much like “sorry, nobody wants to make AAA games on the Vita, but at least you get remote play and streaming”.

Nhazul

That is what I read, word for word. I didn’t but a freakin’ Vita to stream and remote play, nor do I want to. If I want to play a PS4 or PS3 game I’ll do it on the said consoles? Anything otherwise, for me, is a novelty/gimmick. I want my Vita to play on the go, away from my TV, in transit, or simply at a buddies place. The Sony reps response was terribly disappointing. At least we are getting some decent support from japanese studios on their obscure games, keep em coming. I’ll buy every hunter clone and RPG they push out, RAWR!

Kaien

Remote play will be godlike to play The Witcher 3 hot scenes. I was almost got caught with Triss…

otakumike

They need people to buy the AAA games when they make them though, which apparently not many are doing. :/

SolRevr

This is it exactly. With such a small install base in the US and EUR (1.7m & 2.5m respectively), the numbers are not great for creating these types of games.

Activision really botched it with that Call of Duty game though. If that thing had been really good, I imagine it might have done some good business for Vita. Killzone: Merc does pretty well, but Killzone never sells a ton even on the home consoles.

otakumike

Agreed, I assume those that bought Call of Duty were left with a poor taste in their mouths and either quickly sold their handheld or just stopped buying games for it. Call of Duty was actually a very critical game for Vita and the fact that it was handled so poorly was disheartening. Had the game actually been made with care then I believe the Vita wouldn’t be doing so poorly.

So part of the blame goes to consumers themselves and the other to lazy devs.

hng qtr

“You can have AAA games on Vita, you just need to buy a 400 US$ console to play them.”

freestylinyoshi

You mean ,”Buy a 400+ console to play” (continue) retro HD 8bit Indie games in 1080ip

Something to note is that “AAA” is a relative term. There are no fixed budgets or financial criteria connected to that term. When one says something is “AAA,” they usually mean it’s a big-budget effort for the platform it was built on.

So… recent examples of AAA games released for portables in the West could be:

honestly, i couldn’t careless about AAA games and i’m kind of happy
they’re not on handhelds since they’re already on PCs and home consoles
and people already complain about about the console versions of those.

JoJo_718

With the exception of Japan Studios, Media Molecule is small and yet they launched the wonderful Tearaway, by this statement he confirms that the rest of the worldwide studios doesn’t care in slightest about the Vita.

Nhazul

Tearaway was a lovely game, I won’t disagree with that.

Rafael Monteiro

Well, it shouldn’t be something bad, but Vita really can’t have big titles. You can’t spend all that time developing a game like Gravity Rush and have only one platform to launch it. That’s not even Vita’s problem, you can’t release some games only on PS3 or X360 too, you need both.

But that doesn’t mean PS3/X360 games can’t have Vita versions, and althought they’re not exclusive games, multiplatform is still pretty good. We could also get smaller games that would be awesome anyway, like a new Crash or a new Tomba, it doesn’t have to be big to be good.

Shady Shariest

This! Spin-offs are entirely viable. Experimenting something new on an older franchise is best when combined with handhelds.

If the pricing is right I wouldn’t be opposed to Far Cry: Blood Dragon-like games for Vita. Release title on PS4 then spin-off/mid-tier for Vita. If they are unique fun experiences like FC:BD I could see them doing really well

Amagidyne

What do they even mean by ‘economics’? Like, it costs too much to develop bigger games for the vita? It’s just not possible on a portable console as opposed to a home console?

It’s probably a subtle way of saying it isn’t worth the effort because they don’t sell enough to justify the costs. I didn’t want to put words in his mouth, which is why I quoted him word for word, but that would be the obvious takeaway from what he said.

Amagidyne

Seems that way, especially since he moved right on into pushing those streaming/remote services.

Makes you wionder if they’re being really smart or really dumb to not take the risk of trying to put out a really great console quality game for the Vita.

Well, you could argue that they tried with Killzone, Uncharted: GA and Tearaway, but I think those games all suffered at the hand of different obstacles.

The problem with games like Killzone and Uncharted is that better versions of those games are already available on consoles. The other problem—especially in the case of Uncharted—is that the console games get a “2” or “3” or “4” put on them, while the handheld version gets a subtitle. That isn’t a good message to send.

Tearaway was a really, really solid effort, but I think the market for that sort of game just doesn’t exist on Vita. It doesn’t have the kid audience that a game like Tearaway needs in order to succeed.

Amagidyne

Aye, valid points. I think a big difference with Sony’s handhelds as opposed to Nintendo’s is that they don’t seem to have a solid base of games. It’s all a bit hodgepodge and everything looks like a swing in a random direction, wheeas Nintendo’s seem to know their base and can commit to it, so can venture out into different fields with more confidence, to appeal to more people.

Well, the one major advantage Nintendo have is that they’ve spent years building up a handheld business and giving it its own personality. For that reason, people rarely discriminate between Nintendo games on consoles and Nintendo games on handhelds.

Plus, yeah, Nintendo do like to try funky stuff on handhelds that a lot of other companies don’t, like Style Savvy or Tomodachi Life. That’s just the nature of the handheld business… they aren’t consoles, and if you want to create a large market for your handheld, you can’t treat them as such. You have to aim for the audiences that don’t just play shooters or don’t just play RPGs.

DanijoEX ♬ the Cosmic Owl

Do you think it’s possible is that Sony lack of experience with handhelds could be that they enter the portable business late?

Like you said, Nintendo has greater experience because they’ve doing it for years. i could be wrong…(And I can’t even type right still…)

I think that’s definitely part of it. As a result, I also think they misread the market. The portable market literally goes from 6-year-olds to 40-year-olds. You just can’t focus on 16 to 20-year-olds and hope to sustain a handheld business on that audience alone.

DanijoEX ♬ the Cosmic Owl

Yeah, that is bad way to do it.

tubers

IMO it’s also with the gamestyle and what most of Sony’s current success are home console entries that somewhat relies on being “technical marvels” or “cinematic games”.

It seems to me that most N games are just shader/stylized/”art style” heavy and not exactly aiming for something more complex or trying to be more realistic. The latter is likely way more harder to translate to a weaker handheld (PSV), maybe even more expensive with more complex assets.

It’s a hard thing to cram that into a handheld within the “same gen” (PS3 to PSV, PS4 to PSV) because the weaker hardware takes a massive hit in the visual department with having expectations of “should be on par” with the PS3.. maybe Sony’s fault too of marketing some “console quality on the go” w/c could send mixed and confusing messages.

The problem with games like Killzone and Uncharted is that better versions of those games are already available on consoles. The other problem—especially in the case of Uncharted—is that the console games get a “2” or “3” or “4” put on them, while the handheld version gets a subtitle. That isn’t a good message to send.

Problem too is that people don’t bother with the % 33 less pricing than home console games ($ 60 vs $ 40) at least for KZM.

UCGA at $ 50 still sold the most but became a PS+ IGC w/c could’ve cut it legs shorter.

I don’t think the “numbered” issue is the exact problem but it’s prthe B-tier studios doing the VITA games for the respective IPs.

KZM = GC not G main
UCGA = Bend not ND

Can’t blame Sony tho. Too busy with the PS4 and I doubt the PS Division has much money as Nintendo.

I don’t think the “numbered” issue is the exact problem but it’s prthe B-tier studios doing the VITA games for the respective IPs.

Well, theoretically this shouldn’t matter, right? I mean, to the casual observer, they don’t know who makes these games and when a studio switch happens.

Just as an example, look at Call of Duty every year. It’s handled by three different studios now, and people don’t seem to play favourites there.

tubers

I assume the rotating studios of the big and yearly CoD aren’t exactly Bend UCGA is to ND UC.

I don’t think the yearly CoD is switching from “UC ND” to “UCGA” then back to “UC ND”-tier.

Budget too is definitely a factor w/c I should have probably been explicit about and I doubt that’s similar to CoDs is to “UC ND/UCGA”. I’d like to think that an ND UC VITA would’ve been more expensive than the one that the VITA got from Bend.

When I mentioned the numbering thing, I was actually going for something similar to what you were suggesting. I think the lack of a number is kind of what tips people off that a game is “different,” similar to the studio theory.

Like… okay, we have Uncharted 1, 2, 3; and each one has gotten progressively more ambitious. Then, all of a sudden, “Golden Abyss” drops out of the sky, and the knee-jerk reaction is, “Oh? It’s not Uncharted 4? Guess I don’t need it, then.”

tubers

IDK.. I feel like people who are interested with UC/ND would’ve “Oh (not numbered)? Let me check what it is.

*checks web”

Then finds out a couple of videos and reviews that it’s a relatively grainy looking, watered down handheld experience at $ 50 and is mostly positive because of portable novelty (UCGA/Bend). :P

I guess I’m just assuming that most of UC’s demographic browse the web. I doubt their effective target market are mostly web challenged.

I can definitely be wrong. I have no data. I still do see your scenario panning out plenty of times.

P.S. I have a feeling U.C. PS4 might not get the “4” in its title.. it’s probably more cool if they do tho since it’s on the PS”4″.

malek86

You know, that part about the grainness is kind of Sony’s fault for making sub-native res games on their own platform. They could have made the graphics worse and increased the resolution, but I guess they were too busy trying to make a game that looked PS3-quality.

It’s a bit ironic if you consider that they actually went the extra miles to assure 1080p games on their console, unlike Microsoft.

tubers

That’s where I am torn.. in the end, I find myself being fine with either. I hope there’ll still be some games that are native as well as “reasonable” sub native (AO/better shader quality/geometry/etc.).

I’m “moody” with VITA’s sub-native games.

malek86

Rather than costs, it’s a matter of time. If you tell ND to work on an Uncharted game for the Vita, you are pretty much telling them “suspend whatever console game you’re working on and do something else”. If ND had worked on Golden Abyss, we probably wouldn’t have got The Last of Us on the PS3.

Remember when Gran Turismo PSP took forever to come out, that was because Polyphony was spending all their time on GT5. I think that’s one of the cases where Sony could have simply gone with a B-team, asking them to port GT4 or something. It would have sold more than the final game did, since all the delays meant that it was released when western players had stopped buying PSP games. And GT PSP, being a rush-job for the Go launch, ended up being pretty meh anyway.

In other words, there’s time and time. Sony would be stupid to ask their A-teams to make PSV games now, because at this point, it’s pretty unlikely that they would help sales.

tubers

“Can’t blame Sony tho. Too busy with the PS4”

That’s also what I’m trying to say. The timing is also important and what’s most important (at least show through actions) to Sony are home consoles.

So that’s how bad the PSP GT was? Interesting that it was still one of the top sellers.

It’s also a matter of priorities like you’re implying; Home consoles first and foremost for Sony with its limited budget:

“Sony would be stupid to ask their A-teams to make PSV games now”

“it’s pretty unlikely that they would help sales.”

*(high budget “AAA” Western Sony studio working for a full VITA game)*

Probably, but I’m willing to give that the benefit of the doubt. Hasn’t been done.

malek86

I think that matters, actually. Remember how people complained that Arkham Origins wasn’t made by Rocksteady?

It might be okay on consoles, but since the Vita is mostly bought by hardcore gamers who probably keep up with the news and care about this kind of stuff, on that platform the problem must be a lot bigger than on home consoles.

Sony doesn’t inspire them confidence by putting their B-studios to work on portable games. Nintendo has their best teams working on 3DS, and Capcom and Squenix kinda do as well.

OK, that is a fair point. I doubt most casual users are even aware of Vita, so the studio thing could very well come into play when speaking to the Vita audience specifically.

Amagidyne

‘Can’t blame Sony tho. Too busy with the PS4 and I doubt the PS Division has much money as Nintendo.’

Maybe, but the fact that they’re not willing to commit more to thier portable division is why they’re in this sinkhole. How they can expect to compete with Nintendo, who have been working with portable consoles since 1980 (the Game and Watch), by basically half-assing it is a mystery.

They need to step it up and actually try to make the Vita a competitior, rather than just throwing random things at it and seeing what happens.

tubers

There’s truth to that but I don’t think they have enough resources atm so they’re going to keep focusing on the PS4.

I seriously doubt they’re very interested in trying to go gung-ho with the VITA anymore. Investing more on the PS4, the other hand..

..kinda leads to me think that if ever Sony is going to try with another different handheld (outside VITA 3000 and Remote Play Editions), it should be a PS4P (full digi+ phys.”DRM) w/ VITA b/c. Perhaps a “travel console”.

Not exactly a next gen 3DS competitor (but possibly more of a Full Windows Tablet “alternative” for multi-plat games) because it’ll be more expensive, impossible to pocket on 1st revision and late to the party (5 – 7 years from now).

I think it’ll do at least slightly better than the VITA has been doing and may even make business sense by extending hardware lifespan (PS4 APU, less R&D, acquisition of new tech license) and developers having experience with the PS4 hardware.

Interestingly enough, the VITA still survives. How much more for a hypothetical handheld console that has actual spine out of the gate. This can exist even outside a regular “next gen VITA”.

Even if the PS4P doesn’t set record sales, it’ll still be chock-full of great selections from the mature VITA library, let alone the PS4 part.

There has yet to be a handheld like such AFAIK..:

The VITA doesn’t have full PS3 digital library (zero latency).
The 3DS doesn’t have full Wii digital library.

Scrap the PS4P if there’s a miracle in latency and global infrastructure for PS Now Cloud Gaming Service. I really, really doubt that happening in 5-7 years but who knows.

XYZ_JolteonZ980

Kind of seems like an odd experience since well, theres always been people to vehemently state that they dont want console level games on handhelds, just look at discussion of PSVita before it started.

Doesntly really make sense to poor big budgets in vita titles in the western world when companies DNA makes them more suited to consoles.

Let JPN do console level games on vita. They are more experienced.

QueenDecim

I still love the Vita catalog. It may not get much love from Sonys out of house first parties (second parties?), but I still think it has quite the log of games to play through. *boots up muramasa*

lackofstyle

Agree Completely *boots up muramasa, then remembers that I cant beat second dlc goes and play fez instead*

Kornelious

I feel bad for the western/shooter crowd of gaming on the Vita. Those JRPG and other Japanese games are where it’s at right now :P

Stephen Mc Devitt

Gravity Rush, MGS HD collection and Borderlands 2 said hi.

Surgeon of Death

TWO OF THOSE ARE PORTS. They are all good games (which I own) but I can’t help but feel your missing the point.

Stephen Mc Devitt

Perhaps so.

Lynx

I really don’t think Sony NA know how to handle handhelds, given both the treatment of the PSP and Vita.

At this point, my expectations for internal Sony NA support for handhelds as a whole is pretty low.

Anthony Hadow

Most consoles have problems and most consoles could have their problems fixed fairly easily. Its something that seems to be getting worse every new gen.

Enju

I just don’t think western developers/Sony NA care enough to create “AAA console level” titles on the Vita. :/

Odin

Is this still Sony’s mindset? It’s not selling THAT bad right now. Sure, it could be better, but if they think they’ll somehow overtake the 3DS, they’re a little delusional.

The market and audience aren’t there, and most kids (from any territory) aren’t going to be picking one up unless they don’t already have a PC or smartphone.

It’s always going to be in an odd position, given the 3DS, and devices with more powerful specs. With the Nvidia Shield and soon to be Tegra K1 devices, Sony’s going to be in a more difficult position down the line regardless.

Nicholas Perry

Sony Screwed themselves with the Vita before it even launched in the NA. They constantly shoot themselves in the foot in ways that seem completely oblivious to them.

tubers

“With the Nvidia Shield and soon to be Tegra K1 devices, Sony’s going to be in a more difficult position down the line regardless.”

W/c leads me to think that a good way for Sony’s next “additional” handheld strategy should be no less than a Handheld PS4 (5-7 years from now) with non-proprietary expandable storage. You were after all talking about Shield (w/c is a relatively large handheld and active cooled).

Want a whole day battery for VITA games? How about 2-3 days of PSP/PSOne games? SURE!

Another “typical” next gen VITA (uncanny valley home console experiences [similar to Nomura’s comment about KH on the VITA]) would be in worst position as the next gen 3DS will divest most of the remaining few, supposed VITA fortes (shooters, racers, sports, action, qHD 2D games, etc.) because it will be powerful “enough”..

“Rarely” doesn’t mean never. Siliconera posted less than 10 things about both games combined. Heck, two of the three Killzone articles weren’t really related to the game. One was about studio layoffs – the majority of which were at different studios who have never had their games covered on this site. Incidentally, that post was written by you.

I don’t see what Mesa’s comments about western AAA games has to do with a site that covers niche Japanese games, but what I do see is a trend of reporting negative content for clicks no matter their relevancy.

We’ve covered a hell of a lot of western games. Everything Capcom has done in the west, everything Square Enix does in the west, a lot of things that Sony and Microsoft and Nintendo have done in the west, more indies than I can count… the list goes on.

You may not be interested in reading our western coverage, but the fact of the matter is that we do cover those games. One Sony-specific example is PlayStation All-Stars.

Additionally, Mesa is a high-level executive at the company. What he says and does matters—more so now than ever, given that Sony are primarily a western-focused company now.

Anime10121

Hey Ishaan, I know this i offtopic, but you guys seen/gonna cover this?

That does look cool! I’ll pass it along to one of our staff writers. Thanks. :)

tubers

Pretty obvious situation if you’ve been watching the VITA for a while now.

If 3rd year and there’s still no UCGA-tier software (Western), I think it’s a given that the ROI of such a game hasn’t been good. Too early to completely tell with KZM but they did disband/restructure its developers. These are B-tier Sony efforts for the respective IPs.

I don’t think Sony will divert any “AAA” studios away from the PS4 anytime soon since the much more Sony relevant console competition (at least to a lot of investors/etc.) has only begun.

Nicholas Perry

So once again Sony proving their first party support really is inconsequential. Without 3rd parties, systems like the Vita would literally be nothing.

tubers

Mostly “B-tier” 1st party VITA Western support.

Too bad I’ll never see Sony have a testicle to force 3/4 of ND, 3/4 of main Guerilla, 3/4 of [email protected], etc. to work a title on the VITA and been developed for 2-3 years.

Can’t blame them tho.

Monterossa

I don’t think the Vita “has no AAA games” anymore. this argument is old. there are a lot of Japanese AAA games on the Vita and many are getting localize this year. those people who complain might not interest in Japanese games but screw them, I don’t care. Handheld gaming is always for Japanese games since PSP (and before that).

Enju

I think the article was talking more about on the western side of things. Like there is barely any western “AAA” games coming out on the Vita. I do agree that if you don’t like Japanese games, then don’t buy a Vita, because that’s pretty much the main thing to play on it at this point.

PreyMantis

I agree. The Vita is more of a niche portable machine.

Eder García

Japanese AAA games doesn’t exist. the term AAA is west only

brian

FF/KH, and I suppose Persona to an extent since it’s a big deal.
Monster Hunter and Pokemon too.

hng qtr

Persona(or any other Atlus game) isn’t big enough to be considered AAA.

That’s more of sign of a dedicated fanbase that’s willing to spend lots of money on the franchise than a huge one. The games itself, the main and most well known product, don’t sell FF/KH numbers.

brian

Again, to an extent.
edit: Tales could also be argued as semi-AAA.

hng qtr

If it is “to an extent” then it’s not AAA…

brian

Semi-AAA, and with the series growing rapidly coupled with brand recognition in general, it’ll may likely get to that around the time Persona 5 is out.
And there’s also Tales.

Jean Alcantara

What this guy is trying to say is that it sells nowhere near as much as popular Western Franchises like “Call of Duty” or the “NBA2K”. Funny, cause I didn’t buy a Japanese console to play Western-developed games. I bought a Vita for Japanese localized titles like Dynasty Warriors, Dragon’s Crown, and Toukiden, Persona, Dead or Alive, etc…

tubers

Aren’t some FF, RE.. maybe even MH (content-wise) “AAA” games? Hmm.. I guess that’s just about it tho :P

Eder García

nope, these are “westernized” games, add Dark Souls in this list.

tubers

Don’t see it. XV looks more like KH afaik and as far as lots of cinematics go isn’t that staple of recent KH/FF games?.. IDK how that’s really “Westernized” especially MH

Didn’t RE 4 do a major contribution in popularizing OTS TPS before cinematic TPS boomed?

Dark Souls doesn’t seem “Westernized” either (except setting w/c can be skin deep) it seems closer to MH in core combat. So far recent “Western versions” like Skyrim, FO, Witcher, feel much different that DS as far as mechanics go.

if it’s mostly made by JPN developers, it’s concise to say they’re Japanese games.

It seems we’ll be in a slippery slope further back to CRPGS or pen and paper rpgs w/c are Western in origin afaik.

ronin4life

Though this may be considered a technicallity, most of those Japanese games are not “AAA”.

In perspective: Almost no 3ds games are either.

Cazar

Which is why this entire notion that the Vita needs more AAA “console quality” games is misplaced. The 3DS isn’t outselling the Vita in circles because it has console-like games, it’s because it has juggernaut established exclusive franchises like Pokémon, Animal Crossing and Monster Hunter.

No matter how rich the Vita’s game library may become, it will never become profitable in today’s western market for as long as they lack such franchises. The mainstream consumer no longer wants to have to buy a new device to try new things. This is the toll that the mobile industry is taking on the game industry.

PreyMantis

Right. I feel the Vita lacks popular established franchises that sets its own identity. I also feel like instead of its own thing, Sony tries to make it a portable home console or just a companion device to the PS3 and PS4.

IMO what also contributes to Vita’s barrier to entry is the specific and very expensive memory cards. SD cards like the 3DS uses are so cheap, but here 32GB MC cost like 70 euros. I swear portable consoles can never get it fully right; 3DS region locked/cheap sd card versus Vita with no region lock but with hella expensive memory cards.

Seems like Fnac and Multimania are overpricing them (see link above). Even the 16 one is hovering between 30 and 40…That’s a really bad sign of lack of cohesion in that market if you ask me. Btw did you notice how used ones are more expensive than new ones? lol. Oh and I’ll edit my original comment then

Nesther

Yeah the current memory card market is really odd. Can’t say I’m really happy with how Sony is handling it.

Lemski07

bought a 64gb memory at the cost of my 1 week salary.

Hexodious

They’re not that expensive. I recently bought a 8GB MC for €15,99 and a 16GB MC for €30,99 and 32GB MC cost here around 40-50 euros.

I replied in the comment below about that with a link. However my point is I understand why younger crowd can’t jump in on the Vita wagon when parents already shell out like 200 euros for a gaming system, and then have to pay like 40-90 euros worth of “empty” memory cards. It’s just not strategic pricing when you’re a big company who’s struggling for more market share.

ギャビン

I just want some more fighting games on the Vita. I don’t really care about AAA.

Western devs need to step it up for handhelds. Japanese companies are releasing big projects for 3DS and Vita all the time. Indie devs enjoy handheld successes and include them in multiplatform. Major Western devs? Nope.

JonathanisPrimus

I don’t know if you noticed, but a lot of Japanese publishers are moving a lot of resources into smartphone gaming. In turn, that has meant a decrease in output on console and handhelds. Western publishers have always treated handhelds as port/cheapo tie-in dumpzones. That market is now the phone space as well.

dark-kyon

The real problem,is what sony need to do game for portable system,not console games in portable format,sony and the westerns dev dont know make games suited for handhels,sony at least got right with fredoom war,gravity rush,oreshika but they need original portable games.also i believe what the psvita is not too powerful enougth to get multis of ps3 westerns AAA games,for what even wii u in what the third partys sell like crap got more AAA multiplataform games what psvita,in anothers words is most dificult run a AAA western game in psvita what in wii u.call of duty psvita outsold call of duty wii u but activision do not put another in vita.

Izzeltrioum

Just keep SE away from the VITA and all green.

Monterossa

No, I’m waiting for FFXII HD.

Ni ~Algidus~

I’m waiting for a new entry on the Type series

Amagidyne

I’m still waiting for the first entry in the Type series.

Ni ~Algidus~

soon you’ll be able to play it in eng my friend

SolRevr

Damn right. And maybe a new Dissidia if we are lucky. SE was good to us on PSP. Hope to see more from them on Vita.

It’s a damn handheld! It doesn’t need AAA games, just good games specifically made for the Vita and not just laggy or buggy ports of ps2 games or waterdown ps3 games.

pokeroi

well, 3DS has a couple of AAA, depends on how do you define it. For me a AAA is a large project, and nintendo surely spend lots of effort to make their game suit handhelds. Sony, in opposite, want to recreate the home console experience on a handheld, it’s even their slogan for vita.

Well Nintendo has four big titles coming to the 3ds this yr; MH4G, PQ, and Pokemon. Sony is in trouble with the Vita :P

Lastlight

Freedom Wars
Soul Sacrifice Delta
Over my dead body 2
PlayStation Now
Depends how you look at it

Yuuki

SS and FW yes, Over my Dead Body 2 not so much,
Now isnt even a game…..
but we can agree that none of their games can compete with Pokemon or MH4G

Lastlight

But Now would sell units.
And yeah…you’re right

Lastlight

PS Now is gonna sell units though
And yeah maybe it can’t compete with 3DS games but the vita is far from being in trouble.
I heard about the BL2 bundle being sold out at different retailers.
I also heard about the vita selling more than the 3DS in japan too.

otakumike

They tried AAA. People don’t buy them. If more people bought what they offered then more devs would find reason to make them. Guerilla tried really hard with killzone and I don’t think they made much profit with their efforts, so why should they keep supporting it? This is pretty much the case with the WiiU as well. Devs don’t make money, devs don’t make games.

At least companies like NISA are thriving on this handheld and I for one love that.

As long as those JRPG’s keeps rolling in (like the PSP) I’m fine with that

Manny Being Manny

The simple fact is that most people who’d want AAA games want the best quality graphics and you can’t get that on a handheld. Those kinds of people will always stick with consoles, so it makes sense to appeal to different demographics on handhelds.

Stop it. Nintendo has never had an AAA game on a handheld and nobody expects them to. Meanwhile the Vita has that expectation. A lot of DS games would be TRASHED if they weren’t Nintendo DS games and were released in current state on Vita.

Kouji Tamino

The 3DS doesn’t have AAA games, yes, but Nintendo treats their handheld games just as well as their home console games if not better. With the marketing blitz that Kid Icarus Uprising got you would have thought it was a AAA game. Meanwhile, Sony is content to treat the Vita as if it were a side project.

Lastlight

So those commercials for gravity rush never happened…and the ones for CoD and AC3 liberation.
I remember them as clear as day. For gravity rush they had the girl with all the apples floating around her. And with CoD the guy had a recoiling vita in his hand.
AC3 liberation had the girl on the train. And at the end of some of them a dual shock 3 would transform into a vita.
Member this bad ass onehttp://youtu.be/GMbHVr4orVo
Those were quality commercials, on par with some PS4 commercials.
I wouldn’t say that they are treating it like a side project at all.

Kouji Tamino

And then they promptly gave up. In the west they seem content on the Vita being an indie machine and PS4 peripheral. And don’t get me started on how they just let the Vita sink or swim for about a year before attempting to do anything to stimulate sales.

Yuuki

so much for vita not being as psp2 ;)

Lastlight

Cause no one wanted to buy it/
No one wanted to male any games for it. I don’t blame em.

Fallen_Persona

Part of me thinks that even if Sony did that they’d be thrashed for not having AAA games. It’s almost like it’s one of those things where people believe “If you can, you should.” when it comes to AAA game graphics. It’s sad really. And it’s going to be obvious how sad it really is when Tales of Hearts comes out and probably will also get ignored because it’s not AAA.

Also, Sony just doesn’t market Vita in the states. Heard it has a decent amount of marketing in Japan. Hence why it’s doing better. Also, that’s because Nintendo is a handheld company, and that’s what’s consistently made them money. Sony is the exact opposite.

Rayhan PromisedGallery

i don’t give a f**k about AAA-quality, i just want good games!!

It’s a freaking handheld, why the hell the game needs to be console-quality that much!?

Towel

Unrealistic hype and expectations. Both parties never learn.

z_merquise

Too bad that even the Sony rep admit that bigger-budgeted games aren’t feasible for Vita.

Vita becoming more like a haven for indies, console ports and niche games. And remakes for old (and not-that-old) console games.

Personally, it ain’t bad. As long as those games are good, it’s what matter to me. And once in a while, we still get to see original games made for Vita.

We may not see the likes of bigger publishers showing huge support but as long as there are other smaller publisher/developers still taking advantage and continuing the support, Vita is far from this “doom and gloom”.

Lightthrower

Yep! Remember the remake of Tactic Ogre on PSP? Damn that was good!

Anime10121

I can kinda see where he’s coming from, I mean, if you want a big studio to do a big quality game, why limit yourself to Vita when you can do so much more on Current gen/last gen consoles… But still, it kinda defeats the purpose of the Vita’s existence for it to be such a powerhouse of a handheld console, and yet nobody’s willing to fully utilize its capabilities…

Catch 22 if I ever heard of one :/

Ni ~Algidus~

why for the love of god, people want your typical AAA on vita? no matter how you see it, developers don’t want to waste resources to make a AAA game on a handheld. they want to save as much money as possible to invest on the console AAA game.

Hexodious

I also believe AAA games home town is on a console. I believe that the Vita is more fit for games such as Monster Hunter-type games, turn-based RPG and JRPGs, 2D side-scrollers and stuff like that.

Ni ~Algidus~

yup. a handheld needs to be promoted as a handheld not your PS or Xbox consoles. the handheld audience covers people with far more different ages and taste than the home consoles audience that is dominated by the typical 16-20s years olds who wants these AAA franchises so bad.
The lack of understanding that SCEA has of the handheld market is way too high.

mynameisdats

This. If you want AAA console quality games. Then get a console.

CozyAndWarm

That’s how Sony has been promoting the Vita from the very beginning though, “console-quality games on a handheld”

Heartlesswithaheart

I guess you could say they “Don work on the Vita.”

Michael Kelehan

If I bought a Vita for AAA games, hoping for the next Killzone and Uncharted, I’d be disappointed, too. I just bought a Slim this week, for two reasons: remote play, and (localized) Japan-developed games. Thanks to PS+, I’m playing Gravity Rush and Soul Sacrifice, and I’ll eventually be playing Danganronpa and Freedom Wars. So, it’s all good.

Tenabrus

I find it BS that between 2008 and 2011 when PSP hacking was at an all time high and it was easier than ever to pirate psp games that almost every AAA title for that system came out and yet here in 2014 with the vita which hasn’t been hacked yet nobody wants to develop anything on.

pokeroi

well, at least my vita is super usefull to play ps2 remakes.

subsamuel01

I think we need first party triple AAA titles on the Vita at least. Nintendo released a ton of first party titles which is why the system caught steam, I think Sony needs to do the same thing. Killzone was probably the last major Vita first party title.

Juan Manuel M. Suárez

As a day one buyer, I do feel it’s kinda shitty to say that you can have AAAs by buying a PS4. I don’t care about streaming, I want my PSV exclusive AAAs. I want more Tearaway, Killzone Mercenaries, Gravitiy Rush, Uncharted: GA, Soul Sacrifice, P4: The Golden and so on and so forth~.

That said? The PSV has a lot of games at this point; from indies to ports to exclusives. On the other hand, I can’t think of one 3DS AAA game, most of its best sellers are games that look as if they were low budget [Animal Crossing comes to mind] in terms of production value and yet nobody, not one person [that isn’t an anti Nintendo fanboy] raises any kind of quarrel about the 3DS not having AAAs or not having Western titles in it~.

Will the PSV make it somewhere like the PSP did? No. Nobody’s going to give the system a chance. But to say that the PSV has no games, has only ports, has no AAAs, isn’t worth it or whatever else uniformed people say it’s just to talk out of your ass. The PSV has come a long way, it offers a lot more than the 3DS does for a difference most people spend on a weekend out. Sure, the 3DS still has an upper hand with games, Nintendo’s first party line up will always win people over and Capcom’s MH is a system seller. But that doesn’t mean the PSV is a barren wasteland or that the library is inferior, things have changed dramatically since 2k12 and whether people like it or not, the PSV is capable of offering experiences the 3DS just can’t due to its limited hardware. I don’t see games of KZM’s caliber on it nor do I see ports like NGS / Dragon’s Crown, etc on it either. People just need to stop being blind brand sheep and either give the system a chance or to just move on~.

Ni ~Algidus~

>I want my PSV exclusive AAAs
>P4: The Golden
…
–

>On the other hand, I can’t think of one 3DS AAA game, most of its best sellers are games that look as if they were low budget [Animal Crossing comes to mind] in terms of production value and yet nobody, not one person [that isn’t an anti Nintendo fanboy] raises any kind of quarrel about the 3DS not having AAAs~.

Ya’know. that is the point of a handheld. having low-to mid tier budget games. because you can test new mechanics on them and not get hurt to a point that will make you to close your studio if the game didn’t sold 1m or more of copies.
And the 3DS don’t get hated for “not having AAA” because it is advertised as a handheld that will play handheld games and will not have “console quality’ games.
Also 3DS have “AAA games” (for handheld AAA standard). look at Kingdom Heart Dream Drop Distance or Resident Evil Revelations on the 3DS, these two are clearly not your mid bugdet handheld games (in the case of psp we got T3B, KH BBS, Type-0, CC FFVII, God Eater Burst and the Monster Hunter games which are not midget budget psp games)..

Juan Manuel M. Suárez

Kid Icarus Uprising is AAA too by handheld standards, but on the 3DS they are far inbetween, on the PSV they aren’t. So go figure. All I’m saying is, the 3DS doesn’t get half the heat the PSV does even though it shares many of the same things people chalk up to the PSV~.

Suicunesol

It sounds like you are assuming that the existence of AAA games defines a system’s success.

Well, it doesn’t. At least, not for handhelds. Just look at sales of the 3DS and Vita. I think a lot of it has to do with where audiences expect to get AAA experiences. Western audiences want their AAA games played on big screens. Not on little ones. Don’t you think the same?

People seem to favor 3DS because it’s delivering the way they expected it to, which means good, quality fun for a fair price, with everyone’s favorite brands. At 240p, with or without 3D. Period. And they didn’t need “AAA” to make it happen.

Meanwhile, PSV has gotten some AAA support, but sales are lacklustre. That can only mean AAA is not the way for handhelds, as sad as that might be.

Guest

You are assuming the term ‘AAA’ wrong, here it serves to represent big-bugdet Western titles such as Call of Duty or GTA; but as proven by DS, GBA, 3DS, and others etc. those don’t make a system worthy or succesful.

3DS doesn’t receive the ‘heat’ because Nintendo delivers great games without etiquettes and no distinction by platfform, no matter the budget, as that’s is irrelevant for the user; powerful hardware isn’t important either, the games are.

Juan Manuel M. Suárez

So, you mean a game by Square Enix isn’t an AAA? Because the production values for games like FF, Dissidia, The 3rd Birthday, KH, etc says otherwise. Nintendo delivered more of the same, they just profit on the fact they have a cult following, it’s not that the new Zelda was groundbreaking or that Pokemon is redefining the series. Powerful hardware is important, or else you’d still be playing on a monochrome GB. Tell Nintendo in the 16 bits era if hardware wasn’t important to them when they outperformed Sega every single time~.

Guest

Here, what the PS Blog reader meant with ‘AAA’, was just that, big-budget Western titles.

At the end, there is not a short route to denominate video-games, ‘AAA’ is just a buzzword, it means nothing, like “next-gen” or “blast processing”. Most of what you listed are basically Japanese video-games with high production values.
But so is Zelda, so is Mario, so is Fire Emblem, so is Animal Crossing. The fact that you can’t perceive that “cost” by smoke and mirrors is meaningless.

And I highly disagree, Nintendo provides new experiences every time, while taking advantage of what makes the medium unique. Innovation in games goes beyond mere aesthetics; brand new settings or new characters are not as important as the mechanics presented on those. And still they provide both on others as demonstrated by Wonderful 101 or Denpa Men. And to restate what I said last: (the most) powerful hardware isn’t important. I’m sorry to say it but Vita is a good example of that, lacked the right game to give to the right audience a buying impulse, I’m sure something like Minecraft could have been the one and that game isn’t exactly a looker nor it screams: “AAA”. Also if we were taking that as a metric then the Neo Geo would had surpassed both the SNES and the Sega Genesis. It should all come to an equilibrium, between cost, what the market wants, technical boundaries, freshness of the experience, etc.

Ethan_Twain

The Playstation Vita is in a really interesting spot. For the longest time the video game console mentality has been “software sells hardware”. Secure the best, the most popular, and the most progressive software for your console and the consumers will follow.

But the Playstation Vita is trying to forge an audience in a different way. It’s almost “hardware sells software”. The big appeal of the Playstation Vita is not the library of Vita games, it’s the quality of the hardware and the robust services Sony offers to the users. Cross buy, remote play, Playstation plus “free” games library… eventually whatever gets worked out with Gaikai. PSN Classics.

Rather than try to build a competitive software lineup for the handheld Sony has focused on making sure that Vita owners can get games cheaply and conveniently, that the games and saves can be played across the Playstation brand with a minimum of fuss, and that the Sony handheld and the Sony console each support the other encouraging anyone who owns one console to own both.

I’m not really a big fan of this strategy. You can get the full Playstation Vita experience only if you also buy the Playstation 4 (and games for that Playstation 4). You can get the full Playstation Vita experience only if you pay a monthly bill for access to the Playstation Plus service and continue to pay that bill indefinitely. I’m not convinced that this is really consumer friendly behavior – it’s more like a glorified upsell.

On the other hand, this makes a lot of sense for Sony to do in the handheld space. The 3DS and iOS both have absolutely killer software linups, but neither of them is able to tie into an ecosystem like the Vita does. Apple TV never really became a big deal so they don’t have a stake in home theater entertainment, and Nintendo just doesn’t have the resources to try and create a multifaceted multimedia structure like the giant corporations Sony, Microsoft, and Apple can. So if the Vita can’t compete in original software, maybe this is for the best?

malek86

I dunno. Sales-wise, their strategy doesn’t seem to be working. The only place where they have decent sales is Japan, and guess what, that’s because japanese software has finally started coming regularly.

So, nope, hardware apparently is not enough to sell software by itself.

ddsfan2

I disagree. It clearly has software, even if those are primarily ultra niche titles that sell tiny quantities, but there are games being developed for it on a regular basis, and often exclusively. It is a somewhat specialized system, maybe like the Sega Saturn.

Not having software is largely dependent on what kind of games that you enjoy playing, and the general public seems to only want a few well known franchises on handhelds at the moment.

Anthony Hadow

I bought a Vita for NISA titles. Now if they would just sell a cord that lets me play and stream the console, and the 64GB memory card that would be lovely. The PSP has a nice 15$ cord you can buy that does just that. I don’t want an extremely expensive Vita TV. A few new accessories would go a long way Sony.

oresamawasugoi

Unsatisfying answer for me, since I don’t buy download only titles nor will I ever use PlayStation Now.

mynameisdats

Then Vita is not for you.

dboyz

no hope on SCEA T.T, lets pray for SCEJ & Xseed !!!

decus

Release the vitaTV in the west or some other $100 price-point way to access Vita games and I’ll consider buying in. Otherwise the price of the vita is currently set at ~6 brand new 3DS titles once you factor in the memory card gouge and enough of them are coming that I can justify holding off on a vita purchase until years and years in the future after I finish the 3DS games. And maybe by then you’ll stop price gouging the cards.

Anesia Hunter

the vita tv isn’t compatible with all vita games and it’s even doing poorly in japan.

Anime10121

All hardware (except for the 3DS and maybe Vita) does poorly in Japan. Japan is not the world, you cant use what works there as an indication of what works everywhere else.

Hell if we took Japan as representation of what succeeds in the west, 360 would be a flop, PSP wouldnt have been dead in 2010 (in the west), and Vita’d be doing better than all of the home consoles on a monthly basis.

tldr; Japan does not equal the world =/

Juan Manuel M. Suárez

The PSVTV isn’t the answer, it’s limited in what it can do. The price of the memcards is high, but people have 50% of the fault there for literally violating the PSP with piracy. The PSV has been out for two years now and it hasn’t been cracked at all [excluding the PSP hack to play PSP isos]~.

If the price is too much for you, skip. The system is priced more than adequately when compared to inferior hardware like the 3DS~.

SolRevr

I would be surprised if VitaTV ever comes to the west. They’ve barely sold over 100k of them in Japan.

$200 for the new slim pack that comes with Borderlands 2 and an 8gb memory card is a pretty good deal imo. The new 2000 is a slick and comfortable model too.

NeptuniasBeard

Anyone noticed how all these “big games” are significantly smaller than the “small” ones. I say, meh!

AlphaSixNine

Don’t really care about boring AAA myself so screw that. Localized games from Japan is why I bought a Vita. :3

DarkLight

This^

Brandon Coley

Ditto

Arcueid Brunstud

they aren’t boring just dull games that rip off movies.

AlphaSixNine

To me most are. Maybe not much boring but more that it gets dull quickly.

They look pretty but most that’s all there is to it. I personally think they waste too much money trying to look too realistic. That’s my problem with most western AAA titles.

Duo Maxwell

Isn’t that exactly what makes it boring?

FTM

Yep. It’s why I just about ditched everything except for the PSP and DS last gen. Plan on keeping it 95% Vita and 3DS this gen too.

AlphaSixNine

PS3 gets most of my favorite JRPGs like Atelier or Tales so I still get Sony consoles. I am hopeful PS4 will get my favorite JRPG series too in the future so I bought one.

bykfiend42

I’m the same way, keep handheld dev costs down so publishers won’t be afraid to take chances and portable games don’t cost $60+. AAA can stay on consoles and PC.

Ric Vazquez

This a million times! He must be on some good weed to be saying that only Uncharted and Killzone are decent.

Lights

I wouldn’t say no to a game like GTA on the Vita though.

Yan Zhao

Couldnt agree with you more. I only care about Japanese games localized.

rekka_zan

Project Diva and Ys is why I bought a Vita :3

Rose Spinoza

Amen!

DarkLight

I’m actually pretty okay with this cause I’m loving the niche games the vita is getting.

Earthjolly

So basically what he said was the onle way Vitas getting a bunch of AAA’s is streaming PS3 games via PS NOW or remote play PS4 games, which are not even a vita game nor can I actually remote play when I’m on a train miles away from home.

If It wasn’t for my extreme love for jrpgs , right now I would sell my Vita

Tanthalas

Well, that’s hardly encouraging.

I don’t think that the Vita needs whatever is considered a console quality AAA title, but the answer definitely isn’t streaming games from the PS4. I have a beautiful big TV to play my PS4 games on…

At the very least SONY itself should be developing a few big games on the VITA. It’s kind of sad that you only see the Vita’s “power” if you’re piggybacking on a PS4.

Invisbin

I think it needs bigger games. I mean if the psp could get amazing games like it did…

subsamuel01

Uncharted sold over a million copies on the Vita and is the highest selling Vita game to date. Obviously their is demand for high quality game.

dahuuuundge

I don’t want console ports and rehash.. I want game experience unique to Vita only.

Martian Wong

I brought my PSV when AC Liberation released. I have no regret. I just purchased/Preordered Senran Kagura Versus Let’s get Physical and Freedom War. And I am sure I will invest more money into my Vita. I just love my Vita.

Hinataharem

I still love you Vita <3

Kamakuma

That avy sales that love~ x’D

MisterHoot

This kinda shows why, apart from memory card prices, SCEA is still the last big major thorn on the vita’s side. While the other sections seem to have produced a fair amount of good content (europe brining a lot of quality big titles, and a lot of indies, and japan also brought a lot of first party new ips as well as bringing a significant amount of japanese third parties on board), the excuses from Don Mesa sound very empty

James Reilly

Get Rockstar to make more GTA “stories” games like with what they did with the PSP that moved sales. There is your western “AAA” that would breath life into the system for those not too fond of Japanese games.

-Misaki-

If anything, Vita will have really long life span, triple A titles might come really late of Vita’s life span. I don’t care though, just bring me those fancy Japanese games and I am much more satisfied. Vita is already one of the best systems I owned.

Learii

just localized JRPG that all I want

buddyluv324

I think Vita can still have AAA games, but one of its biggest issues is that some of these so-called AAA games that are on the system now are not only ported from home consoles but a good number of those AAA ports that are on the Vita just dont hold up as well on the smaller portable system.

If Sony can acknowledge that the Vita is primarily a portable system , Im sure more developers will be willing to build AAA games for the Vita from the ground up. I think its great that the Vita is starting to become a home for more niche titles. I hope this will encourage more developers to try to build a Vita game build specifically for the system like we’ve seen with Gravity Rush and Soul Sacrifice.

malek86

This is what I don’t get, their insistence on home console ports. I don’t think people play portables for those, and technically, you can just remote play them, so what’s the point?

I mean, Borderlands 2 on Vita? Like, some 18 months after the original release? Who here really thinks that’s going to move sales?

buddyluv324

Basically Sony wanted to push the Vita as a portable version of the PS3 leading to its launch date. Unfortinately they overestimated the power of the Vita and gave us half-ass ports like Boarderlands 2, Ninja Gaiden Sigma, and more. Of course not all ports were terrible. There are some exceptionally good ones like Blazblue, Dragon’s Crown, Mortal Kombat and some others.

Sylveria Shini

The economics of “big games” don’t work period. Outside of a few rare exceptions, “big games” are underperforming, companies are seeing huge losses, and studios are closing.

This isn’t helped by companies insisting on giving Vita games digital only releases. Those cards are small and incredibly expensive. I have a 32gig card, which at the time was the biggest available, and I got it “Cheap” for $77 off Ebay. If I wanted to get all the Atelier Vita games, that card would be more than half full, adding about $10 to the price tag of each of those games.

Mrgrgr and Unacceptable World

Well, Nintendo “big games” sure is doing well here. So i think, Sony needed to come out with some ways to make their big games worked?

Dylan Anantha

I don’t mind the lack of AAA games on Vita, I enjoyed niche stuff like Demon Gaze and Toukiden way more than any of the Vita’s AAA games.

Christopher C

I never had a ps3 so PS now putting ps3 games on vita would be awesome!

Oliver Teigaga

Games like GT6, GOW Accension, Ratchet Nexus should have been developed for the Vita instead of the PS3 which was already a huge success by 2012 and had an infinite amount of 3rd party titles to keep people busy. Sony werent willing to put the Vita as priority over the PS3 and this is the result.

Antonio C. R. Murray

The commented is right. What separates Nintendo from Sony overall in gaming is that Sony doesn’t keep it 100 on all its platforms. When it comes to getting 3rd party exclusives, deals, etc. Nintendo’s 1st party will fully support all of its platforms. Naughty Dog stated on record that they wouldn’t support the Vita so what message does that send to the rest of the Western market? Retro Studios would never have even been allowed to talk down on the 3DS.

buddyluv324

Comments like Naughty Dog’s show that western developers for the most part just dont want to put in any sort of effort making games exclusively for the Vita unless its a port of a console game in most cases. As we’ve seen with a good number of western developers, they’re more concerned with giving out “Hollywood” experiences in their games rather than trying to put any sort of effort and making new, innovative gameplay experiences.

As for where I stand on my own opinion, I’m not only glad that Japanese developers are giving the Vita the momentum it desperately needed but the vast majority of the recent and upcoming titles are not only niche but also give a much better gaming experience than the western developers have been giving the Vita. I have both a Vita and a 3DS myself. I do enjoy both systems overall, I been finding myself going back to the Vita more than the 3DS.

CozyAndWarm

…then what was the point of releasing a handheld and promoting it for its hardware specs? Aren’t “console-quality” games the stuff they were promoting about the Vita from the very beginning? Why such a low level of confidence from Sony’s own devs, when nearly all of Nintendo’s devs have supported 3DS?

This is a huge lack of confidence on Sony’s part, I’m honestly surprised Sony let those comments go through. Looking at the recent exodus of developers and billion+ dollar loss though, I guess Sony’s gonna Sony.

XanaduNext!!!

I was always wondering when people would start realizing that the AAA games they think the vita should get will never happen. I mean if a studio is gonna spend the amount of money a AAA game costs to make, why would they EVER release it on a portable system. Of course those games will only ever be bound to Console/PC. Ports after said game’s initial release however is another matter though.

Dystopiq

So basically, ports and remasters. There is so much you can do with the touch controls. Wasted potential.

Mr_SP

Only from Western Developers. Japanese developers, like the makers of Open Me, are good about support. What I think it is, is that Western developers are more interested in graphics, over good design. AC Liberation tried for graphics, failed in story and gameplay, resulting in a game that was generally “meh”. Then again, it was a spin-off of AC3, and that wasn’t exactly brimming with good plot.

Japanese games, however, are actually releasing games on both platforms, because they’re not so heavily focused on graphics – though stuff like Dragon’s Crown still looks beautiful. Super Robot Wars, Natural Doctrine, Dynasty Warriors, etc. Once you start trying to get things that legitimately push the abilities of the PS3 to work on Vita, you start to have issues.

Not that there aren’t actual Western console games on Vita, like Telltale’s stuff. Port or not, it is exactly the same thing as the PS3 offered, within a year of it’s final episode, and within months of it’s retail release. (And, let’s face it. If you have a “console quality” game for Vita, you’re probably just as well off releasing it on PS3 as well.)

Tarkovsky

“What I think it is, is that Western developers are more interested in graphics, over good design.”
YES! Somebody who shares the same view as I do. However, personally I think that statement applies to all Western games in general. I have yet to play a Western game in recent memory that feels like it’s trying something new. Whereas I’ve played dozens of Japanese games that have interesting game mechanics. Never will I see a Western dev make a game like Okami, Katamari, MGR, Vanquish, Valkyria Chronicles, Ghost Trick, TW101, Resonance of Fate, Ico, SotC, Deception games, MonHun games, Souls games and etc. My observation is that Japanese devs concentrate on core gameplay mechanics and etc and making sure that they’re interesting while Western devs are more concerned with story and narrative. They’re both heading in extremely different paths and I feel that one is trying to actually push the boundaries of gameplay while the other one just wants to be groundbreaking by making emotional and touching narratives. This is just general statment though as there are some Western devs doing gameplay stuff and Japanese devs doing narrative stuff.

Mr_SP

Well, western developers do come up with things like Brothers: a Tale of Two Sons, which did a neat “single player multiplayer experience”. Remember Me had an interesting, though horribly underutilized, concept in memory remixing. Unfinished Swan’s color and lighting gameplay. Journey, Flow, and Flower from thatgamecompany. Those are some good to great games with thoroughly unusual concepts and mechanics. And there are Western games that refine core ideas, like Guacamelee, Tearaway, or Thomas Was Alone.

But… those aren’t exactly “console quality” in some people’s eyes. Most of them are “indie games” – which is a great place to find games banking on good ideas as their primary sales pitch.

Nor do I think Western games are too focused on story. I’ve seen great plots and interesting characters in Japanese games, and western games leaving me confused and uncertain. Not that it isn’t also true of certain Japanese games.

Tarkovsky

Yes I should’ve been more specific but I was referring to the bigger developers. There are definitely indie devs doing interesting thngs but most larger Western devs aren’t. I definitely agree that Remember Me was interesting(kudos to them though as it was the studio’s first game) and so was Dark Void, to a certain extent, with it’s vertical cover system.

Like I said, I was just being general but when I look at my game library of Western games and think about them. All I ever think about is immersion, narrative and story and nothing about them makes me think that they are trying to push the boundaries of gameplay.

Japanese games on the other hand have me really excited about the possibilities of new genres and types of gameplay. I think this preference of mine comes from the fact that I see gameplay as King and story as an icing on the cake. Unless a game is designed that way like visual novels and etc(a genre of games that I do enjoy) then I find that games like Bioshock Infinite, Skyrim and etc to be extremely dull. Just an opinion though. I have nothing against people who enjoy them and think that that they are great

Personaly, I have more respect for a game like Neverdead, which tried something
really interesting but flopped really hard, then a game like say Dante’s Inferno which was solid and fun but played it extremely safe.

Mr_SP

Oh, I don’t think you’re entirely off base. I don’t play a huge number of big western titles, so I don’t know how a lot of games stack up.

But, I am playing Skyrim now, and it has a LOT of content, and a lot of worldbuilding additions, but it doesn’t have a lot of character interactions, or innovative gameplay. It’s fun and great, but I’ve got Kodlak dying and making me the head of the Companions, yet I spoke to him a whole THREE times. His journal in his room tells me more about him than anything else in the game. Now, I do love it, but I have more fun stabbing dragons and exploring new places than I do from it’s plot or depth of gameplay. It’s main additions over Oblivion are dragons and snow, but if you want gameplay, it’s not exactly your go-to option.

Video game stories from other sites on the web. These links leave Siliconera.